PSoTD

I admit it, I'm sinking to their level.

But if a newspaper or other supposed journalistic endeavor is going to label as terrorism any issue, group of people, or activity that clearly is not terrorism, then I'm going to label that as journalistic terrorism. I mean, as long as we're doing it, why don't we all just water down the term "terrorism" to mean something another person doesn't agree with or hurts their feelings?

So... a big get screwed to the Sonoran News, which commits journalistic terrorism with this dungscript.

The more Ben Domenech talks, the less acceptable of a selection for the Washington Post he proves to be. The Washington Post shouldn't be hiring ANY bloggers until they get someone in charge that:

1) does due diligence on the background of the blogger; and
2) has a clear picture of a full palette of views and interests to be represented - and can explain that palate.

Obviously, they don't have anyone to do either yet.

From Poynter Forums:

Washington's annual Radio-Television Correspondents' Association dinner is Wednesday night, after which it might not be a bad idea to put the event on hiatus for a few years. Along with the White House Correspondents' Association dinner and, yes, even the white-tie granddaddy of them all, the Gridiron. Out of respect for the troops. At least until the wholesale bloodshed subsides in Iraq.

Exactly on point. And while we're respecting people, the dinners ought to be stopped out of respect for the American taxpayers, for the international community that has to work with this administration, for the memory all the past members of the press that worked in earlier generations, and everyone else on the planet disgusted by egotistical whoring glee clubs.

They are a gross, gross embarrassment to the press, with the biggest disappointment being that the press doesn't completely realize that fact.

The Washington establishment has a use/hate relationship with bloggers. They use bloggers to report stories they currently aren't ready to report on (Michelle Malkin's blog said this and this...) but they really don't like bloggers telling them how the news media is perceived.

The Gridiron Club Dinner has to be videotaped and distributed to the public without the "journalists" knowing. That should be a goal within the blogosphere this next year - to figure out how to get this, and then distribute it. I think video of Tim Russert in a blue dress ought to be available to all. I think George W. Bush's lameass jokes ought to be available to all. I think these attitudes ought to be available to all - in video.

I can't wait to see Atrios and Kos and Instapundit and Michelle Malkin singing lame-ass song parodies sucking up to the powerful.

CAN'T THE CAPITAL PRESS CORPS TAKE THEIR JOB SERIOUSLY?

With the serious messes that politicians and the news media ineptly continue to grind our country into further, this kind of stuff pisses me off. I wish they would give the names of every reporter that participates in this bullshit. Obviously, they're too pussy to identify them on their website.

I'm sorry, but when people are screwing up so badly, and the ramifications of those screwups are so great, a big freaking joke of a party of the powerful is the LAST THING I WANT TO SEE.

I thought that was him in the Failure to Launch promo...

An editorial from the Herald-Journal in Spartanburg, SC:

Solution to earmark problem is more congressional responsibility, not more presidential power

In pushing for a line-item veto, President Bush is trying to resurrect a failed idea that is unlikely to solve the problem he wants to address. Bush proposed legislation Monday that would give him the power to veto individual spending items in appropriations bills. The president said it would allow him to strip out pork-barrel spending.

...

More presidential power is not what's needed.

The answer is more responsibility in Congress. Representatives and senators have to change their budget system to disallow special projects and focus on national priorities.

Frankly, if newspapers believe that the issue lies with Congress, then they should understand that one of the biggest problems is that these members of Congress treat the budget deficit as if it has no repercussion on their ability to be re-elected. Why? Because it doesn't. They keep getting re-elected. And they almost always keep getting recommended for re-election by... their local newspapers.

So why do newspapers act like they care about balancing the budget? Where is the proof, beyond the lip service, that they care? Do newspapers take hard positions - vote for a balanced budget or face our opposition at election time? Do newspapers complain when pork comes to town? Why would anyone really expect a newspaper to oppose pork in the first place - after all, chances are that some of that money might end up in their pocket.

So why do newspaper corporations pretend like they care about the deficit and porkbarrel spending? Why the act?

It must be embittering, as part of Hollywood, to realize that the greatest thing you'll ever be remembered for is launching the career of Jimmy Kimmel.

And to be asked if he used to be the guy in the Cracker Jack commercials...

Why can't Americans believe the government's propaganda better?